Alice Evans-Ioan Gruffudd

[Notatallanamechange]

In court this week, think this is the last part of their legal stuff? Anyway, what has really struck me with this is how the Daily Mail have been complicit in her narrative and the abuse he gets. It’s came out in the court she has made 30k from them, selling her stories. I’m aware it’s an absolute rag, but paying someone with an DVRO and running their stories, in an attempt to paint their victim in a negative light is surely low, even by their standards?

Sneaky fuckers, it wasn’t paywalled when I posted it

Here is an archived version - but it wasn't behind a paywall when I clicked on it

https://archive.is/ODRrZ

This is astounding. They’ve now put it behind a paywall? Absolutely shocking.

There were comments online that she admitted he never cheated on her. Does anyone know if that is true?

If that’s what “believe women” actually means, why do people who use that phrase use it when talking to people who aren’t the police? “Oh, you’re skeptical of so-and-so’s claims against what’s-his-name? Well, personally, I always choose to believe women, but if you want to side with a rapist/abuser, that’s your call.”

I found her Tattle threads a few years ago. Her behaviour has been astonishing

I saw that DM article this morning and it def wasn’t behind a paywall then. I think they moderate and delete comments on some of the other articles about it as well.

I don’t think I remember anything about her admitting she knew he hadn’t cheated, but one of the witnesses from last week said she’d planned to leave him a few months before he left.

And sadly that’s what this all boils down to. She wants revenge because he left her before she could leave him. She’s prepared to destroy multiple lives, including those of her own children, to get that revenge.

I've just tried it and it's not currently behind a paywall for me - but it might depend where you are accessing it from.

In court this week she undermined the narrative that she has been pushing in the media since 2021 about being "blindsided" by him moving out as they had the "perfect life" when she was cross examined with messages that she sent to him and other friends. The messages revealed that she had decided to leave him in summer 2020 (around 6-7 months before he moved out) and she had already told the kids they would be getting a "new daddy" to replace him.

It has been a 5 year revenge campaign because he moved out and filed for divorce first.

Weird, it has the M+ symbol on the home page but when you click on it, you can still read all of it

(hopefully my screenshot attached)

Because people weaponize slogans all the time to win arguments. Sometimes maliciously, sometimes they genuinely misunderstood the origin. Happens a lot with words or phrases from Black American culture - “woke”, for instance, has been warped and weaponized by the political right to mean almost the opposite of its actual root. And most people would not be thrilled with their elementary school kids saying “6-7” if they knew what it actually meant.

All “believe women” means is “treat their claims seriously and investigate”. In the Evans/Gruffudd case, pretty much every claim Alice made has been upended by actual investigation, and it’s resulted in an extended DRVO and hopefully financial consequences.

Just out of interest what does 6-7 actually mean? I’ve never found a proper explanation for it!

It’s lyrics from a rap by Skrilla referencing a block in Philly. The lyrics are actually:

“Shooter stay strapped, I don’t need mine,
Bro put belt right to they behind,
The way that switch, I know he dyin’ … 6-7.”

Obviously, the phrase as it’s being used in middle-class playgrounds has morphed, so much so that if you try to look up its origin, most results say “we don’t know! But this is what it means now…”. But the only reason they don’t know is they didn’t really look, because they don’t care, they’re just using it the way they want to redefine it.

The more I think about what seems to be happening with the DVRO and custody, the more I wonder if Ioan and his lawyers started at a hoped-for end-state and worked backwards. It’s clear the eldest is wholly enmeshed with her mother, and that her mother is content with the status quo and will probably prevent any further effort at reconciliation or therapy, to the point that even attempting it would probably put immense pressure on the kids. And the judge is right, a lifetime DVRO would mean the girls would FOREVER have to choose between the two parents, and Alice has a deathgrip on them right now. So instead of seeing the request for a 5-year DVRO as a failure, I’d reframe it as Ioan’s best chance to reestablish any kind of relationship with his eldest daughters: the DVRO is timed to run out when the youngest turns 18, so this way there is no legal burden on the girls as adults when including either parent, even if that means they’re both invited to a graduation or something. Essentially, Alice can’t fall back on using the rules of a lifetime DVRO as a weapon to make the girls permanently exclude Ioan.

Same theory may apply to custody. Trying to get full custody of the girls may have been more disruptive to them, given prior experience. So just trying to codify the prior agreement, without a judicial order that might make everything more threatening (and exploitable) might truly be the best approach if he’s in it for the long game. The more he can do to show the girls that he prioritized them, sometimes even at the cost of penalizing his ex who had broken every rule in the book, might be more meaningful later when they’re able to look back on it.

I don't think she'd have left him. Alice strikes me as someone who would only leave if she had a better offer lined up and I can't imagine anyone else being crazy enough to want to take her on.

I vaguely remember her and Ioan getting together back in the day and there was a lot of spin put on the fact she'd left her boyfriend for IG (at the time a in demand up and coming actor) because they'd fallen madly in love on the set of 102 Dalmatian's and were powerless to fight it.

I think we'd need to wait for someone to publish transcripts to know for sure if that was exactly what was said - unless the admission came in the form of an exhibit?. But whether he cheated or not really is irrelevant: California is a "no fault" divorce state. People can get divorced for any or no reason whatsoever, and it does not impact the support etc that courts award. The only way to achieve that would be to have a clause in a prenup to that effect.

Even if infidelity was a factor that Judges take into account in CA (which it absolutely isn't) there is also, it seems to me (and I realise people will disagree with me on this point) absolutely nothing wrong with a person who is being abused in a marriage viewing that abuse as a total and immediate violation of whatever vows one may have taken. No one should ever have to tolerate abuse, and abusers often try to exert coercive control by intentionally making it very difficult for people to actually seek or finalise a divorce.

The latter point is underscored in this case by exhibits introduced during the DVRO trial that allegedly show that AE threatened, in writing, to cause/try to cause the divorce process to be delayed so she could prevent IG from being able to marry BW. Not only that, but the intent in the exhibits entered into evidence allegedly included a specific threat to delay long enough such that BW's immigration status would expire and she would have to have to leave the US. If true, that's a terrible abuse of the litigation process, not to mention an abhorrent attempt to try to scupper someone's immigration status out of spite. These allegations demonstrate why an abused party should never be expected to have to wait for the divorce process to be finalised before they find solace and safety and love with someone else. Forcing people to put their lives on hold, and preventing them from having a loving relationship with someone else, would be another "win" for an abuser. Abusers get a sick kick out of being able to continue to control or influence their victim's lives. And allowing them to delay the divorce process as a means of preventing their victim from seeking to rebuild their life would be awful.

Apparently Ioan’s wife Bianca testified that she thought Alice had taken a photo of her walking into court today. Honestly, I doubt it - she’s not completely stupid.

But the entire point of harassment is to make your target feel anxiety, so I would not be surprised at all if Alice squared up her phone and went through the motions. Win/win: makes your target wildly uncomfortable, but if anyone searches your phone, there’s no photo and now your target is even MORE anxious because it casts doubt on their reliability.

It feels like a behavior very much up Alice’s alley.

Isn't it still harassment to get close to her and make her think she has taken a photo? - given that a Domestic Violence Restraining Order was issued against her as recently as Tuesday and Bianca is a protected person under the DVRO.

I know that they probably have to be closer when court is in session but otherwise Alice is required to keep 100m/300 ft away.

Obviously the "remorse" that Alice spoke of didn't last long

Probably, but pretty much impossible to prove. Very much she said v she said. I think that’s why it was brought up, but not pursued.

So Alice’s very own forensic accountant revealed on the stand that she’d lied about her assets on the prenup (making it essentially null and void) and that her and her lawyer have been hiding key documentation. Things are not looking good for Alice. Fraud, perjury…

Yesterday’s revelations were WILD! Alices own forensic accountant dropping her in it and saying she lied about, hid, laundered and stole money before and after the marriage.

And there are still people defending her! It blows my mind. She deliberately set out to manipulate, defraud and financially abuse Ioan before they were even married. So those who are defending her on the basis that he left her and she was humiliated/angry, what’s your excuse for the abuse she inflicted on him before that?

The fact that she’s let her own children live in a state of fear because she’s cried the narrative that she couldn’t afford the rent and they were going to be homeless all whilst having hundreds of thousands of dollars stashed away is sickening and it wouldn’t surprise me if this is just the tip of the iceberg and there’s even more money we don’t know about yet.

Shes happily set up Go fund me accounts and let every day average people send their last $5 to her for absolutely no reason.

Shes not a good person in any way shape or form.

I think anyone continuing to defend her, on here or other platforms, is either evil/abusive/narcissistic themselves and therefore they relate to her, or they are, for want of a better term, hard of thinking.

Alice should be very worried about the IRS and tax fraud charges if she's hidden her assets and income from the IRS.

It's crazy. You don't often get to see such a ridiculous moment in court. Hiding assets is such a massive NO when dealing with prenups and assets in divorce. And in this case it also seems that the lawyer may have potentially been involved with trying to keep evidence of asset not only out of court but also away from IG (the commentators have claimed that the lawyer told the Judge what to do!! Which is insane behaviour in court!). Hiding assets such a basic error and stupid thing to do. Because as soon as you fail to disclose assets - and even worse you intentionally try to hide them - you are begging the court to order sanctions, fee shifting, and to classify any hidden assets as community property subject to division - in fact it's worse than that: the whole amount of whatever was hidden can be awarded to the other spouse. This isn't a secret either - it's made abundantly clear in the instructional documents.

Not only that, but by so brazenly lying to the court it's likely AE has shredded any goodwill/benefit of the doubt he may have given her as to whether she was actually remorseful or telling the truth at any point during her testimony. It's making Alice's decision to push this debacle to court look utterly insane. If she had behaved decently and make full disclosures and participated in good faith in the divorce process she would have way more money right now and also far happier and well adjusted children. Instead: she's become a laughing stock at best and a pariah at worst who cannot be trusted.

She hasn’t filed taxes in years. It may have taken its time but she will get her comeuppance.